We have also considered whether the existing policy of imposing restrictions on foreign ownership could be abolished, but has to recommend against
against such a step having regard to the following
16
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(£)
the risk of a television licensee company falling into "hostile" ownership;
the influence which a foreign owner would be able to bring to bear on the editorial and programming policy of a television station as evidenced by the changes Mr. Rupert Murdoch has been able to effect in SCMP;
television being removal of such
a powerful medium, the sudden an element of control at this point in time may arouse suspicions as to Our motives on the part of the Chinese; particularly as the licences will run beyond 1997;
the argument put forward by BCIL that ownership and control can be separated is fallacious, since the latter is derived from the former;
we
if control of foreign ownership were removed will need a provision in the Television Ordinance similar to that in the Film Censorship Ordinance to impose political censorship. This is so because while the Code of Practice does give the Authority the power to censor programmes which are "otherwise undesirable in the public interest", it is doubtful whether the Code has sufficient force in law to deal with politically motivated programmes devised by a politically hostile licensee company; and, lastly
we would be seen to be bowing to pressure which BCIL has publicly brought to bear on Hong Kong Government.
On 24 and 25 November 1987, the BA recommended that the ceiling for foreign ownership be reduced from the current 49% to 20%. Having re-examined this recommendation, the BA is now of the view that the 20% ceiling would be unduly restrictive and recommends that the ceiling should be raised to under 35% (Recommendations (d) and e(i)).
CONFIDENTIAL